An overnight comparison of two ventilators used in the treatment of chronic respiratory failure

Abstract

Ten clinically-stable subjects with thoracic scoliosis were recruited. The subjects were already established on NIPPV, but none were using either of the ventilators to be tested. After familiarisation, the patients used the two ventilators in random order on consecutive nights. Peripheral oxygen saturation and transcutaneous carbon dioxide tension (Pt,CO 2 ) were measured continuously, and sleep was recorded using polysomnography.There were no significant differences in arterial oxygen saturation, Pt,CO 2 or sleep duration and quality between the two nights.Despite previously illustrated variation in laboratory performance, no differences were seen between the two ventilators when comparing overnight gas exchange and sleep in vivo. Further study is required to evaluate the significance of the differences found during bench testing in the clinical setting. Eur Respir J 2002; 20: 942-945.

A Randomised Crossover Trial Comparing Volume Assured and Pressure Preset Noninvasive Ventilation in Stable Hypercapnic COPD

“…Considerable differences in the performance of positive pressure ventilators in terms of leak compensation, delivery of tidal volume and preset pressures are seen in bench tests of NIPPV and the results are not always predictable from the ventilators' operating principles (15,16). Previous investigation has shown little effect on nocturnal ventilatory parameters or sleep quality when comparing different pp-NIPPV ventilators (29). Given the experimental nature of the va-NIPPV ventilator and the potential for negative effects, it was important to compare it with a clinically established pp-NIPPV ventilator, although this comparison does make the results more difficult to interpret.…”

Quality control of equipment in home mechanical ventilation: a European survey

“…clinical studies [13][14][15][16]. The differences between ventilators stem from the fact that the CE mark simply denotes a formal statement by the manufacturer of compliance with the essential requirements of the European Medical Devices Directive (risk assessment and management; chemical, physical and biological characteristics; infection and microbiological contamination; etc.)…”

A bench test to confirm the core features of volume‐assured non‐invasive ventilation

“…In this study differences in minute ventilation were noted between the two ventilators when assessed in the pp‐NIPPV mode, probably reflecting varying pressurization and response times 10 . The effects of such differences in vivo are less clear with no changes in clinical outcomes described when comparing pp‐NIPPV ventilators 11 . As well as the ventilators' intrinsic properties different modes of NIPPV have been compared.…”